Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS 26. Beccaluva, L., Macciotta, G., Piccardo, G. B. and Zeda, O., Clinopyroxene composition of ophiolite basalts as petrogenetic indicator. Chem. Geol., 1989, 77(3), 165–182. 27. D’Antonio, M. and Kristensen, M. B., Serpentine and brucite of ultramafic clasts from the South Chamorro Seamount (Ocean Drilling Program Leg 196, Site1200): inferences for the serpentinization of the Mariana forearc mantle. Min. Mag., 2004, 68, 887– 904. 28. Lindsley, D. H., Pyroxene thermometry. Am. Mineral., 1983, 68, 477–493. 29. Nimis, P., A clinopyroxene geobarometer for basaltic systems based on crystal–structure modeling. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 1995, 121, 115–125. 30. Barnes, S. J. and Roeder, P. L., The range of spinel compositions in terrestrial mafic and ultramafic rocks. J. Petrol., 2001, 42, 2279–2302. 31. Ohara, Y., Stern, R. J., Ishii, T., Yurimoto, H. and Yamazaki, T., Peridotites from the Mariana trough: first look at the mantle beneath an active back-arc basin. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 2002, 143, 1–18. 32. Bonatti, E. and Michael, P. J., Mantle peridotites from continental rifts to ocean basins to subduction zones. Earth Planet. Sci., 1989, 91, 297–311. 33. Arai, S., Characterization of spinel peridotites by olivine-spinel compositional relationships: review and interpretation. Chem. Geol., 113, 191–204. 34. Varfalvy, V. and Hebert, R., Petrology and geochemistry of the pyroxenite dykes in the upper mantle peridotites of the Northern Arm Mountain Massif, Bay of Islands Ophiolite, Newfoundland: implication for the genesis of boninitic and related magmas. Can. Mineral., 1997, 135, 543–570. 35. Schwartz, S. et al., Pressure-temperature estimates of the lizardite/antigorite transition in high pressure serpentinites. Lithos, 2013, 178, 197–210. 36. Saccani, E. and Photiades, A., Mid-ocean ridge and suprasubduction affinities in the Pindos ophiolites (Greece): implication for magma genesis in a forearc setting. Lithos, 2004, 73, 229–253. 37. Dick, H. J. B. and Bullen, T., Cr-spinel as a petrogenetic indicator in abyssal and alpine-type peridotites and spatially associated lavas. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 1984, 86, 54–76. 38. Jan, M. Q. and Windley, B. F., Chromian spinel-silicate chemistry in ultramafic rocks of the Jijal complex, Northwest Pakistan. J. Petrol., 1990, 31, 667–715. 39. Arai, S., Chemistry of chromian spinel in volcanic rocks as a potential guide to magma chemistry. Mineral. Mag., 1992, 56, 173–184. 40. Ishii, T., Robinson, P. T., Maekawa, H. and Fisk, R., Petrological studies of peridotites from diapiric serpentinite seamounts in the Izu-Ogasawara-Mariana forearc, Leg 125, Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, 1992, 125, 445–485. 41. Hirose, K. and Kawamoto, T., Hydrous partial melting of lherzolite at 1 Gpa: the effect of H 2 O on the genesis of basaltic magmas. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 1995, 133, 463–473. 42. Kamenetsky, V. S., Crawford, A. J. and Meffre, S., Factors controlling chemistry of magmatic spinel: an empirical study of associated olivine, Cr-spinel and melt inclusions from primitive rocks. J. Petrol., 2001, 42, 655–671. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank DST, New Delhi for financial support (Grant No: SR/S4/ES-389/2008). We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their incisive comments that helped improve the manuscript. Interactions of lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) with non-primates in the Western Ghats, India Joseph J. Erinjery 1, Honnavalli N. Kumara2 , K. Mohan1 and Mewa Singh1,3,4,* 1 Bio-Psychology Laboratory and Institute of Excellence, University of Mysore, Mysuru 570 006, India 2 Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore 641 108, India 3 Evolutionary and Organismal Biology Unit, Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, Bengaluru 560 064, India 4 National Institute of Advanced Studies, Indian Institute of Science Campus, Bengaluru 560 012, India Primates and non-primates inhabiting tropical forests may interact with each other since they coexist in the same communities. Primates usually interact with their prey, predators, competitors and neutral species. Using ‘all occurrence’ sampling, we have studied inter-specific interactions of lion-tailed macaques with non-primate species found in their habitat. We observed that the percentage of total time spent on interactions with non-primates was less than 1. Also, the percentage of total time spent in interacting with competitors, predators and neutral species was less than 0.5. The lack of predation pressure and lack of opportunities for mixed-species associations for increasing foraging efficiency appear to be the major reasons for the absence of interactions with nonprimates. By comparing with studies from other primate habitat regions, we observed that primates in South Asia interact much lesser with non-primates than those in South America and Africa. A previous study showed that the interactions of lion-tailed macaques even with other primate species in the Western Ghats are less than expected by chance. Keywords: Inter-specific competition, mixed-species troops, Macaca silenus, primate–predator interaction. PRIMATES in tropical forests may interact with other nonprimate species which coexist with them1–3. These interactions could be either positive, negative or neutral4,5, and may vary with space and time5–7, largely depending on ecological and historical factors which shape them. The primates mainly interact with their prey, predators, feeding competitors and neutral species, and may display a variety of behaviours towards an interacting species5. Most direct interactions such as aggression and submission occur when two species encounter in close proximity8. Long-distance interactions such as alarm calls and spacing calls are important for communication about detection of predators and foraging9. Received 30 July 2016; revised accepted 29 November 2016 doi: 10.18520/cs/v112/i10/2122-2129 *For correspondence. (e-mail: [email protected]) CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017 2129 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS The primate–non-primate interactions are more common in the neotropics, followed by Africa and Asia 3. The primate–non-primate interactions are mainly with other mammals and birds, and usually the non-primates are attracted to the primates than the other way around3. It is stipulated that the chances of such commensal interactions are high in Asia, Africa and the neotropics, as primates in these regions are mainly large/medium-bodied, wasteful feeders with large group sizes inhabiting open habitats3. However, it has been observed that both body size and group size do not have any effect on primate– non-primate interactions3. The nature of primate interactions could be largely determined by species-specific temperament and personality5,10,11. Some interactions after encounters may result in active associations between interacting species which are formed more commonly for reducing predation pressure and increasing foraging efficiency1,6,12. Generally, two species are defined to be in an association when they are in close proximity, usually within a distance of 50 m, and this may vary with the species being studied and their habitats13. Information flow between species that share common resources and predators is an important aspect of communities9. Such associations have been largely observed among primate–non-primate species as in the case of Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus entellus) – chital (Axis axis)14 and chacma baboon (Papio ursinus) – rock kestrel (Falco rupicolus) associations7. Also, the animals are often observed to interact when feeding on clumped resources and when their travel routes converge15. Lion-tailed macaques are habitat specialists of tropical rainforests of the Western Ghats, India16–18. Previous studies have shown that lion-tailed macaques avoid interacting with other primate species in the Western Ghats11,19. Also, the studies assessing the inter-specific interactions of primates with non-primates is South Asia are rare in the literature. However, such studies are essential to understand community ecology and interdependencies of species in an ecosystem. Hence, we studied inter-specific interactions of lion-tailed macaques with other nonprimates to understand whether primates in the Western Ghats interact with other species. Based on previous studies conducted on inter-specific interactions of other primates in Asia and primate–primate interactions in the Western Ghats11,13,20 , we expected the lion-tailed macaque to spend less time on inter-specific interactions with other non-primates in the Western Ghats. As lion-tailed macaques are found both in highly fragmented forests with largely open canopies and human disturbance as well as relatively undisturbed and large stretches of continuous forests21, we also intended to compare such inter-specific interactions between groups inhabiting both habitat types. Our study conformed to the ethical guidelines for animal treatment of the University of Mysore, and we obtained permissions for conducting wildlife research from the Forest Departments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu. 2130 We conducted the study in two sites in the Western Ghats: Nelliyampathy and Valparai. In Valparai, data were collected from two different locations: Andiparai and Puthuthottam. Details about the study groups in Nelliyampathy and Andiparai are given in Erinjery et al.11. The group in Nelliyampathy inhabited a contiguous forest surrounded by coffee/tea gardens and the groups in Andiparai and Puthuthottam inhabited fragmented forest patches. Puthuthottam is a privately owned rainforest fragment of about 1.25 km2 area surrounded by tea gardens, at an altitude of about 1100 m. Since both these are fragmented habitats, we combined the data of these locations for the present study. The study in Nelliyampathy was conducted from December 2010 to October 2012 with 736 h of total observation time. The study in Valparai was conducted from September 1996 to August 1997 with 1696 h of total observation time. We systematically followed the macaques for 92 and 212 d in Nelliampathy and Valparai respectively (8 h/day), and used only these data for the analysis. The data were collected between 0800 and 1600 h for full day. We employed ‘all occurrences’ sampling method by taking detailed notes of interactions, as and when they occurred. We collected data on date, time, interacting species, activity of macaque and other species during the interaction, type of interaction, aggressor and the recipient, displacement (if any), species displaced, and duration of the interaction. For analysis, we considered only those interactions wherein we could observe the beginning and end of an interaction. We divided inter-specific interactions into two types: long-distance interactions and close-proximity interactions. We included alarm calls as a long-distance interaction. We considered an arboreal species to be involved in a close-proximity interaction only if that species was within a proximity of 5 m from an individual of the liontailed macaque group. For terrestrial animals, we considered an interaction to take place only when the animals were directly under the trees where lion-tailed macaques were present. We considered the lion-tailed macaque to interact with a predator, which was mostly a raptor, only when the latter directly hovered over the trees where liontailed macaques were present. We further divided the close-proximity interactions into two types: neutral and non-neutral. In neutral interactions, lion-tailed macaques tolerated the other species. In non-neutral interactions, they were aggressive towards other species. Aggressive interactions included chasing, fighting and/or displacing of interacting species. When interacting with predators, we considered lion-tailed macaques to be aggressive if they gave continuous threatening bark calls directed at the predator. We did not observe any interactions where lion-tailed macaques were submissive to other species. On the basis of previous studies on lion-tailed macaques and our own long-term observations in the CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS Table 1. Frequency, mean duration, percentage of total frequency and percentage of total time spent on inter-specific interactions by lion-tailed macaques with non-primates in Nelliyamapathy and Valparai Species interacting Location Frequency of interaction Mean duration of an interaction (min) Percentage of total frequency of interaction Percentage of total time spent on interaction Nelliyampathy DHL* SE, MHE* GS* GIH* RTD* SBR* Total 2 6 24 6 14 1 53 7.5 11.6 6.3 5.0 9.6 5.0 7.6 3.8 11.3 45.3 11.3 26.4 1.9 100 3.7 17.3 37 7.4 33.3 1.2 100 Valparai DHL SE LEO* GS GIH BD* RTD SBR ELE* Total 2 18 1 34 3 7 8 3 1 77 5.0 11.7 30.0 17.9 16.7 17.9 9.8 5.0 15 12.51 2.6 23.4 1.3 44.2 3.9 9.1 10.4 3.9 1.3 100 1.0 21.8 3.1 44.6 5.2 13.0 8.1 1.6 1.6 100 *GS, Indian giant squirrel; DHL, Dhole; SE, Crested-serpent eagle; MHE, Mountain hawk-eagle (only one killing episode); RTD, Racket tailed drongo; SBR, Sambar; GIH, Great Indian hornbill; BD, Barking deer; LEO, Leopard; ELE, Elephant. Figure 1. as prey. A mountain hawk-eagle with a lion-tailed macaque infant field, we categorized the results of interactions as follows: interactions with predators, interactions with competitors and interactions with commensal/mutualistic species. The major predators of lion-tailed macaques were leopard (Panthera pardus), crested serpent eagle (Spilornis cheela) and changeable hawk-eagle (Nisaetus cirrhatus)22,23. However, we also included other species which elicited threat calls and alarm calls from lion-tailed macaques. The species which shared similar food resources with lion-tailed macaques were considered as CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017 competitors. We considered Indian giant squirrel (Ratufa indica) and great Indian hornbill (Buceros bicornis) as competitors, since they shared the same fruits that the macaques consumed. If the other species benefitted from the interaction with lion-tailed macaques, we considered it as commensal and if both species benefited, we considered it a mutualistic interaction. We used chi-square test of proportions to compare between interactions from different study sites. The alpha level was kept at 0.05 and we performed all tests using SPSS 20. Lion-tailed macaques spent 0.92% and 0.95% of their time in interacting with non-primates in Nelliyampathy and Valparai respectively, with no difference in the duration of interactions across study sites (chi-square test of proportions: 2 = 0.051, P = 0.48). The frequency of interactions was 0.05 interactions/h in Valparai and 0.07 interactions/h in Nelliyampathy (Table 1). The interactions with non-primate species included 0.19% and 0.26% of their time with potential predators in Nelliyampathy and Anamalai respectively, with no difference across sites (chi-square test of proportions: 2 = 0.051, P = 0.17). Out of the total time spent on interactions, lion-tailed macaques interacted with their predators 21% and 27.5% of their time in Nelliyampathy and Valparai respectively (Table 1). We observed two killing episodes by the predator (a lion-tailed macaque infant caught by crested serpent eagle and the other by mountain hawk-eagle, Nisaetus nipalensis) during the whole study period. The observation of mountain hawkeagle capturing lion-tailed macaque infant is the first case of such predation in the wild (Figure 1). The crested 2131 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS Table 2. Frequency and mean time spent on neutral and non-neutral interactions by lion-tailed macaques (LTMs) with non-primates in Nelliyampathy and Valparai. Values in parenthesis are the mean time spent on each interaction Nelliyampathy Valparai Type of interaction Frequency (mean time spent (min)/ interaction) Interaction LTM and DHL LTM and SE, MHE LTM and LEO LTM and GS LTM and GIH LTM and RTD LTM and SBR LTM and BD LTM and ELE Observation time (h) Aggressive Tolerant 736 736 736 736 736 736 736 736 736 2 (7.5) 6 (11.6) 0 (0) 11 (8.63) 1 (5) 4 (5) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 13 (9.6) 5 (6) 10 (11.5) 1 (5) 0 (0) 0 (0) Submissive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 serpent eagle was a common predator for primates. They continuously circled around and swooped down when presented with an opportunity. The lion-tailed macaques gave repeated alarm calls at the sight of crested serpent eagle and mountain hawk-eagle (N = 24). Twenty out of 23 interactions with crested serpent eagles took place during the months (June–August) when the macaques had young infants. There were four instances of interactions with dholes (Cuon alpinus), and lion-tailed macaques made barking/threatening calls at the sight of dholes. The lion-tailed macaques also made barking calls in the presence of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus; N = 1) and leopard (N = 1). The most frequent non-primate interaction of liontailed macaques was with the Indian giant squirrel (N = 58). The macaques spent 0.43% (0.03 interactions/h) and 0.41% (0.02 interactions/h) time interacting with squirrels in Nelliyampathy and Valparai respectively. Out of the total time spent on interactions, lion-tailed macaques spent 44.6% and 37% of their time interacting with Indian giant squirrel alone in Valparai and Nelliyampathy respectively. Table 2 presents the data on the type of interactions of lion-tailed macaques with the other species. The lion-tailed macaques were more frequently neutral (N = 43) than aggressive towards Indian giant squirrel (N = 15). Most aggressive interactions (93%) occurred when the two species were feeding. Lion-tailed macaques and other primates in the study area, Nilgiri langurs (Semnopithecus johnii) and bonnet macaques (Macaca radiata) became alert whenever Indian giant squirrels gave alarm calls. Only two out of nine interactions with the great Indian hornbill included aggression. All these interactions occurred on Ficus trees, where both were seen feeding together on figs. Macaques spent 0.30% (0.02 interactions/h) and 0.17% (0.01 interactions/h) of their time interacting with rackettailed drongos (Dicrurus paradiseus) in Nelliyampathy 2132 (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) Type of interaction Frequency {mean time spent (min)/ interaction} Observation time (h) Aggressive Tolerant 1696 1696 1696 1696 1696 1696 1696 1696 1696 2 (5) 18 (11.7) 1 (30) 4 (7.5) 1 (15) 2 (5) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 30 (13.3) 2 (15) 6 (11.4) 3 (5) 7 (17.9) 1 (15) Submissive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) and Valparai respectively. These interactions took place mainly when the macaques were foraging/feeding for insects (N = 22). The drongos continuously followed the macaques and fed along with them. In 6 out of 22 interactions, the macaques chased the drongos. All interactions were commensal. Macaques spent 0.01% (<0.01 interactions/h) and 0.03% (<0.01 interactions/h) time interacting with sambar (Rusa unicolor) in Nelliyampathy and Valparai respectively. Both were found to feed together on jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) during monsoon (N = 4). The macaques reacted with alertness to the alarm calls given by the sambar in three observations. Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak) were observed to feed on jackfruit dropped by lion-tailed macaques (N = 5), and the macaques reacted with alertness to the alarm calls by barking deer (N = 4). The interactions with barking deer were only seen in Valparai (0.28%; 0.01 interactions/h). The interdependencies of species in a community are important to understand the community ecology of a species. While several researchers have studied polyspecific associations and interactions between primate species, studies describing the non-primate interactions in South Asia are rare in the primate literature. In the present study, we collected data on non-primate inter-specific interactions of an endangered primate, the lion-tailed macaque, inhabiting the Western Ghats of South India, to assess their interdependency with non-primates. We found that the interaction of lion-tailed macaques with non-primates was <1% of the total observation time. This shows that the lion-tailed macaque hardly interacts with any non-primate in its habitat. These results are similar to the primate–primate interactions in the Western Ghats11. Haugaasen and Peres1 showed that interactions between primates and other mammals are rare in central Amazonian forests. However, a meta-analysis from different regions has shown that primate–non-primate interactions are most common in the neotropics, followed by CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS Africa and Asia3. It has been observed that the interactions between primates and other species in Africa, Southeast Asia and Central America are higher compared to the present study1,7,24–28. The absence of large raptors that predate on adult primates may be the major reason for absence of associations or interactions between primates and non-primates in South Asia29. Primates mainly form associations after encounters with other non-primates for increasing foraging efficiency or decreasing predation pressure3,29. The present study has shown that the predation pressure for liontailed macaques is less in the Western Ghats (<0.50% of the total observation time), and they do not associate with other non-primates for increasing foraging efficiency. It has been observed that the lion-tailed macaques are aggressive towards Indian giant squirrel in most of the interactions during co-feeding. This is probably because of competition between these species, which feed on fruits of the same trees. The lion-tailed macaque has even been observed to predate on the Indian giant squirrel, Indian giant flying squirrel (Petaurista philippensis), three-striped squirrel (Funambulus palmarum), frogs, lizards and bats16,30–32. One instance of lion-tailed macaque unsuccessfully attacking a mouse deer (Moschiola indica) fawn is also reported30. However, it has been found that other mammals and birds, including racket-tailed drongo, barking deer and sambar were associated with lion-tailed macaques to increase their foraging efficiency by feeding on the food dropped by the macaques. Also, lion-tailed macaques were observed to be alert to alarm calls of barking deer, sambar and Indian giant squirrel. Hence, while interactions with racket-tailed drongos were commensal, those with barking deer and sambar were mutualistic. Additionally, we observed the Puthuthottam lion-tailed macaque group to interact with humans frequently. The lack of inter-specific interactions in different habitats of lion-tailed macaques indicates that the community composition of higher vertebrates in the Western Ghats might not be largely influenced by interdependencies between species, but due to the anthropogenic and historical factors in the past. Also, the low percentage of time observed for associating and interacting shows that liontailed macaques inhabiting the Western Ghats do not form active associations with other vertebrates, with only chance interactions due to sharing of similar habitats with other species. However, the frequency of interactions may depend on the density and abundance of nonprimates in a particular study site. Also, the present study shows that there is little difference in interactions between lion-tailed macaques inhabiting contiguous and fragmented forests. 1. Haugaasen, T. and Peres, C. A., Associations between primates and other mammals in a central Amazonian forest landscape. Primates, 2008, 49, 219–222. CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017 2. Beaudrot, L., Struebig, M. J., Meijaard, E., Van Balen, S., Husson, S., Young, C. F. and Marshall, A. J., Interspecific interactions between primates, birds, bats, and squirrels may affect community composition on Borneo. Am. J. Primatol., 2013, 75, 170–185. 3. Heymann, E. W. and Hsia, S. S., Unlike fellows – a review of primate–non-primate associations. Biol. Rev., 2015, 90, 142– 156. 4. Stiling, P., Ecology: Theories and Applications, Prentice-Hall of India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, 2004, 4th edn. 5. Rose, L. M., Perry, S., Panger, M. A., Jack, K., Manson, J. H., Gros-Louis, J. and Vogel, E., Interspecific interactions between Cebus capucinus and other species: data from three Costa Rican sites. Int. J. Primatol., 2003, 24, 759–796. 6. Stensland, E. V. A., Angerbjörn, A. and Berggren, P. E. R., Mixed species groups in mammals. Mammal. Rev., 2003, 33, 205–223. 7. King, A. J. and Cowlishaw, G., All together now: behavioural synchrony in baboons. Anim. Behav., 2009, 78, 1381–1387. 8. Senf, M. J., Interspecific and integroup interactions of mantled howling monkeys (Alouatta palliata) in primary versus secondary forest at El Zota Biological Field Station, Costa Rica, Graduate thesis, Iowa State University, 2009. 9. Goodale, E., Beauchamp, G., Magrath, R. D., Nieh, J. C. and Ruxton, G. D., Interspecific information transfer influences animal community structure. Trends Ecol. Evol., 2010, 25, 354–361. 10. French, A. R. and Smith, T. B., Importance of body size in determining dominance hierarchies among diverse tropical frugivores 1. Biotropica, 2005, 37, 96–101. 11. Erinjery, J. J., Kumara, H. N., Kavana, T. S. and Singh, M., Are interspecific associations of primates in the Western Ghats a matter of chance? A case study of the lion-tailed macaque. J. Trop. Ecol., 2016, 32, 41–49. 12. Cords, M., Mixed-Species Association of Cercopithecus Monkeys in the Kakamega Forest, Kenya, University of California Publications in Zoology, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles and New York, 1987, vol. 117, p. 109. 13. Struhsaker, T. T., Polyspecific associations among tropical rainforest primates. Z. Tierpsychol., 1981, 57, 268–304. 14. Newton, P. N., Associations between langur monkeys (Presbytis entellus) and chital deer (Axis axis): chance encounters or a mutualism? Ethology, 1989, 83, 89–120. 15. Bryer, M. A., Chapman, C. A. and Rothman, J. M., Diet and polyspecific associations affect spatial patterns among red tail monkeys (Cercopithecus ascanius). Behaviour, 2013, 150, 277–293. 16. Kumar, A., The ecology and population dynamics of the liontailed macaque (Macaca silenus) in South India, Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge, UK, 1987. 17. Molur, S., Brandon-Jones, D., Dittus, W., Eudey, A., Kumar, A., Singh, M. and Walker, S., Status of South Asian primates: Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) Workshop Report. Zoo Outreach Organization/CBSG-South Asia, Coimbatore, 2003. 18. Erinjery, J. J., Kavana, T. S. and Singh, M., Food resources, distribution and seasonal variations in ranging in lion-tailed macaques, Macaca silenus in the Western Ghats, India. Primates, 2015, 56, 45–54. 19. Sushma, H. S. and Singh, M., Resource partitioning and interspecific interactions among sympatric rain forest arboreal mammals of the Western Ghats, India. Behav. Ecol., 2006, 17, 479–490. 20. Rodman, P. S., Synecology of Bornean primates. I. A test for interspecific interactions in spatial distribution of five species. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 1973, 38, 655–659. 21. Singh, M., Singh, M., Kumar, M. A., Kumara, H. N., Sharma, A. K. and Kaumanns, W., Distribution, population structure, and conservation of lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus) in the Anaimalai Hills, Western Ghats, India. Am. J. Primatol., 2002, 57, 91–102. 2133 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS 22. Kumar, A., Birth rate and survival in relation to group size in the lion-tailed macaque, Macaca silenus. Primates, 1995, 36, 1–9. 23. Umapathy, G. and Kumar, A., The demography of the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) in rain forest fragments in the Anamalai Hills, South India. Primates, 2000, 41, 119–126. 24. Tsuji, Y., Widayati, K. A., Nila, S., Hadi, I., Suryobroto, B. and Watanabe, K., ‘Deer’ friends: feeding associations between colobine monkeys and deer. J. Mammal., 2015, 96, 1152–1161. 25. Boinski, S. and Scott, P. E., Association of birds with monkeys in Costa Rica. Biotropica, 1988, 20, 136–143. 26. Desbiez, A. L. J., Rocha, F. L. and Keuroghlian, A., Interspecific association between an ungulate and a carnivore or a primate. Actaethologica, 2010, 13, 137–139. 27. Hankerson, S. J., Dietz, J. M. and Raboy, B. E., Associations between golden-headed lion tamarins and the bird community in the Atlantic Forest of southern Bahia. Int. J. Primatol., 2006, 27, 487–495. 28. Matsumura, S., Yellow-billed malkohas (Phaenicophaeus calyorhynchus) following moor macaques (Macaca maurus) in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. J. Trop. Ecol., 2001, 17, 619–623. 29. Terborgh, J., Mixed flocks and polyspecific associations: costs and benefits of mixed groups to birds and monkeys. Am. J. Primatol., 1990, 21, 87–100. 30. Kumara, H. N., Singh, M., Sharma, A. K., Singh, M. R. and Ananda Kumar, M., Faunal component in the diet of lion-tailed macaques. Primate Rep., 2000, 58, 57–65. 31. Sushma, H. S. and Singh, M., Hunting of Indian giant squirrel (Ratufa indica) by the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) in the Western Ghats, India. Curr. Sci., 2008, 95, 1535–1536. 32. Umapathy, G. and Prabhakar, A., Meat eating by lion-tailed macaque Macaca silenus (Zimmermann). J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 1996, 93, 79–79. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. M.S. thanks the Science and Engineering Research Board, Government of India for the J. C. Bose Fellowship. Received 4 July 2016; revised accepted 12 December 2016 India and China participate in the global market. This communication focuses on intelligent interacting systems which are present over globe and these are a source of rising the software development cycle with the help of modern communication facilities. Free e-Market globalization is now vital for billions of people. However, IT leadership is not possible without a review of the existing system. The present study is based over the issue of the global market related research, education and investment in IT technology. IT-based-leadership can give sustainable global competitive advantage to our country. So the role of iterative software development is crucial to be targeted in a systematic fashion. Keywords: Global software development, information technology, innovation, software services, technology. T HE developing countries are adopting incremental export-oriented software development. These services and trends of the industry are the basis for talent and quality of work, and have also brought more investment. Europe and America are high-wage countries for software and services; they are now increasingly looking for cheap labour, thus resulting in offshoring. International trading of software services creates several jobs. Services trade in software development provides more skilled workers to firms of developing countries. This aspect leads the policy makers to target more opportunities and challenges to produce precious national income. This income and new employment opportunities are the real fruit of the global software development (GSD)1–3. Multinational companies are doing business in countries with low wages for capital saving though local markets. In the present study, we consider the following: doi: 10.18520/cs/v112/i10/2129-2134 Interactive systems regarding global software development and offshoring Ramzan Talib1 , Muhammad Yahya Saeed1,*, Muhammad Awais2 and Kashif Hanif1 1 Department of Computer Science, and Department of Software Engineering, Govt College University Faisalabad, Illama Iqbal Road, Faisalabad 38000, Pakistan 2 Modern information technology (IT) methods are reshaping the global market with great success. With today’s global software industry, IT has made innovations everywhere, including businesses and consumer practices. This has made developing countries like *For correspondence. (e-mail: [email protected]) 2134 (a) Software and information technology (IT) as a whole. (b) Programming and development. (c) Software testing of all types using the principles of GSD. (d) Remotely performing software maintenance work that is offshore. (e) On-line research and development, such as software architecture, product design, project management, etc. (f) IT consultation and on-line guidance of business strategy. (g) Physical product manufacturing like semiconductors, computer hardware, etc. (h) Business process outsourcing/services such as financial analysis, on-line accounting services, digital art, desktop publishing, high-end services, etc. (i) Call centres and telemarketing. The software industry works across national borders more closely associated with all of the above categories. CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 112, NO. 10, 25 MAY 2017